I think Ken Parille has said the last word on the "comics snobs are suffering from class envy" school of comics criticism. I ask (surely in vain) that anyone itching to invoke such arguments re-read this essay before doing so.
This whole thing, for those who don't know, is over Ted Rall's recent overview of the comics which have run in the NY Times on Sundays. The one thing I'd add to Parille's analysis is this: Rall is basically wrong is saying that nobody is talking about these comics. I mean, I write about them all the time on this blog, and I talk about them to people I know in real life fairly often as well. I've seen Mister Wonderful on at least one best of 2007 list, and Seth's George Sprott (which bears so little resemblance to Rall's straw man that I seriously doubt he's read any of it) will make an appearance on my list. Parille himself has written about Mister Wonderful (in fact, he's done so twice.)
Anyway, there may be one of those cataclysmic Beat threads brewing over this. I can't tell if the holiday slowdown is going to stop the coming apocalypse, or if it will encourage it. It seems like some of the most vigorous shouting matches on that blog have occurred over weekends, when (one speculates) people with nothing better to do relish the opportunity to spend a couple of days berating complete strangers for daring to disagree with Harlan Ellison or whatever. So maybe that will be the case here once again. No matter what happens, it's worth checking out just for Eric Reynold's rebuttal (which covers much of the ground as Parille's, but is much more mean-spirited).
One last thing: anyone else amused that Rall cited Noah Berlatsky to fortify his opinions? It was only a couple of months ago that said critic posted a pretty scathing review of Rall's work. The review also ran in the Comics Journal. Rall doesn't strike me as the sort who would forget such a negative review. Interesting.